India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1667
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Vips » 23 Aug 2017 18:26

While China can support Pakistan militarily and diplomatically, commercially Pakistan is dependent on US big time. All pakistani exports which earn them $$ are to US and Western Europe. A small change in the US/Europe procurement could lead to massive unemployment in Pakistan and a North Korea like financial squeeze situation. US can also influence the remittances into pakistan by influencing Gulf States to limit pakistani labour from coming in. China needless to say is not going to import Pakistani merchandise or the jihad influenced vermins into their territory.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1607
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby sudeepj » 23 Aug 2017 20:54

A lot of posters have mentioned a line of argument to the effect of 'Pakistan would not allow it..', 'it' being anything that is against its interests of installing the Taliban in Kabul and against its 'sovereignty'.

My question is, did Pakistan 'allow' the drone strikes? Did Pakistan 'allow' the killing of Bin Laden? Does Pakistan 'allow' the things they say RAW does in Karachi? Did Pakistan 'allow' the Afghan invasion?

Fact of the matter is, Pakistan is a weak state, subject to superpower whims and fancies. A state whose 'mahishiyat' is dependent on exporting 'tauliya' and 'chadar' can not impose conditions on superpowers that also happen to be its sole market for its commoditized exports. People mention Salala, but Salala and the subsequent happenings occurred at a time when there was no CPEC, no upping of the ante in SCS, no detente between India and the US and no Trump.

If they try to obstruct the Americans, the American/NATO response may well be to impose trade sanctions on Pak (under some obscure bylaw and rule they will discover or invent.. dont start quoting WTO rules now!) and that will be truly catastrophic for Pak economy. There is nothing they can sell to China.. And no more takers for their nuke and missile technologies. North Korea has better nukes and missiles, Libya is gone, Iran is a threat to them, Saudis are naraz and reassured that US is back as a security guarantor, so which customer is left?

Pak is in a weird place now.. The only benefactor left is China (US, US, Japan and Arab Sunni powers are gone) and China may well find it challenging to prop up their shitty economy with grants and trade concessions. So far they have extended unaffordable loans and ports, bridges and roads to nowhere that can only create a greater debt burden that will bankrupt the recipients even more than they already are. The Chinese will definitely find it impossible to stop the wrath of the great Khan and the great Chakravartin.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19165
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby chetak » 24 Aug 2017 01:52

Viv S wrote:
yensoy wrote:Forget air, Pakis have to allow transit cargo to Afghanistan as a signatory to UNCLOS - for free (apart from port and haulage charges of course). If Trump decides to, he can enforce this with a big stick and a few carrot shavings thrown in to sway some high level decision makers.

UNCLOS also says -

"Transit States, in the exercise of their full sovereignty over their territory, shall have the right to take all measures necessary to ensure that the rights and facilities provided for in this Part for land-locked States shall in no way infringe their legitimate interests."

Which would be no doubt be used to refuse transit for any non-civilian goods. Also, given that the US isn't signatory to the UNCLOS its locus standi in terms of enforcing UNCLOS mandates is questionable, to say the least.

This pressure comes at a time when Pakland is close to bankruptcy, which will give huge leverage to Western powers at the IMF/IBRD. Yeah Pakis can go running to Uncle Xi but I doubt he will be any more receptive without getting a huge pound of flesh.

And Pakistan is willing to give him his pound of flesh. They mortgaged their sovereignty before, to the US, they'll happily mortgage it again, to China this time.

Bottom-line is, as long as China is backing them (and it is), the US will have limited leverage over Pakistan, regardless of how clear policy directives from the top are.


this time it is very different, chalk and cheese different.

The last time it was the mortgaging of sovereignty, this time it is more like a sale. The consequences and the masters are very different. This one will neither tolerate, forgive, nor forget.

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Guddu » 24 Aug 2017 04:17

To be charitable, she may be conveying to bakis, that India is not a willing participant and that the US forced India to pay up in Afghanistan. This maintains a bit of paki H&D, for the narrative becomes the USA forced India to payup (wihout altering any facts on the ground wrt to India)...ie = =

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1582
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby ldev » 24 Aug 2017 06:16

sudeepj wrote:Pak is in a weird place now.. The only benefactor left is China (US, US, Japan and Arab Sunni powers are gone) and China may well find it challenging to prop up their shitty economy with grants and trade concessions. So far they have extended unaffordable loans and ports, bridges and roads to nowhere that can only create a greater debt burden that will bankrupt the recipients even more than they already are. The Chinese will definitely find it impossible to stop the wrath of the great Khan and the great Chakravartin.


If China can covertly help North Korea which is directly threatening the US with nuclear weapons, you think they won't help Pakistan, which in any event says "Hain Huzoor", every time the US looks at them? The biggest reason China has to prop up Pakistan is to keep India distracted. How much do you think that distraction is worth to China?

While it will be very nice for India to have some kind of overt military presence in Afghanistan, the biggest and IMO insurmountable obstacle is the lack of direct access to support that military presence. Iran is a very un-reliable actor vis-a-vis India. It is rapidly slipping into China's orbit and to rely on the goodwill of Iran for any kind of transit is IMO highly risky with the high probability of China leaning on Iran at some point of time in the future to block Indian transit rights into Afghanistan and other places in Central Asia. That will be how the India China competition for influence will play out.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16221
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby NRao » 24 Aug 2017 07:34

^^^^^

I think so too - Iran is going into the Chinese orbit - China has become a player in A'sthan (like Russia). Which is why the Paki influence will/should decline WRT A'sthan, but will be used by China to throttle India.

However, I do not think that it will work: Indo-Pacific. With the reorder in progress, the Chinese team - worldwide - is under pressure. And for once it does nto seem that the US wants to lead. So, I suspect, it will actually be more of team effort to unplug China.



BTW, that speech by Trump (on A'stan) is actually one provided by the Generals, with a few sentences (India makes billions from US, .....) to allow Trump to toot his horn. And Nikki betti has egg on her face. Within a week or two of her personally thanking Chinese support on NK sanctions in the UN, the US has slapped Chinese companies/individuals with sanctions!!!! Unless it was a great act on her part.

I would not be surprised if Doval had input into all this. I bet he and McMasters sat and gamed the rough draft ............ months ago.

The opportunity has arrived. Just hope India is prepared. I seriously think this is India's chance to displace China in the longer run. And, IMHO, she can do it.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Cain Marko » 24 Aug 2017 09:36

Manish_P wrote:
The expectation that the US should free Balochistan and fight India's fights is beyond ridiculous


Just as ridiculous as the expectation that India fight the fights of the US, as and when decreed by the US - like it expects from it's rent-boy states.

Now look here you Injuns, you made billions from us. Now it's time for you to earn your keep by covering our ass. :roll:


So tell me why mea was in such a tangle to get the US to stay the course in afg. India needs the US there or expect more scum to head towards kashmir. more importantly Nobody is asking India to fight anybody else's fight. Time to let go of sensitive egos and realize, this is very much Indias fight and an opportunity, something that doval and modi have worked hard to setup. If India wants to control the situation, it will have to take the initiative. What form this takes is the question.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4768
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Karthik S » 24 Aug 2017 09:41

Cain Marko wrote:
Manish_P wrote:
Just as ridiculous as the expectation that India fight the fights of the US, as and when decreed by the US - like it expects from it's rent-boy states.

Now look here you Injuns, you made billions from us. Now it's time for you to earn your keep by covering our ass. :roll:


So tell me why mea was in such a tangle to get the US to stay the course in afg. India needs the US there or expect more scum to head towards kashmir. more importantly Nobody is asking India to fight anybody else's fight. Time to let go of sensitive egos and realize, this is very much Indias fight and an opportunity, something that doval and modi have worked hard to setup. If India wants to control the situation, it will have to take the initiative. What form this takes is the question.


If they head towards Kashmir, we'll handle them in Kashmir border no? It's not as if there aren't any infiltration attempts now.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Cain Marko » 24 Aug 2017 10:08

Is always nice to handle trouble away from ones own borders no? Not to mention the many advantages in terms of holding pok in a pincers and easier access to Balochistan.

Anyway regarding Indias response. ...my guess is arms purchases will boom, and Afghanistan will see more Indian hardware. ..hinds, dhruvs?, t72s?

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby arun » 24 Aug 2017 11:17

US Secretary of State humbly and politely enough requests India to “take some steps of rapprochement on issues with Pakistan to improve the stability within Pakistan and remove some of the reasons why they deal with these unstable elements inside their own country”.

India should in turn politely tell the US that we in India have no intention in interfering in the internal affairs of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan :wink: by mitigating the blowback of the policy followed by the Islamic Republics Punjabi Military dominated Deep State of fomenting Mohammadden Terrorism in a vain attempt to intimidate neighbouring States like India.

Remarks
Rex W. Tillerson
Secretary of State
Press Briefing Room
Washington, DC
August 22, 2017 ……………………

MS NAUERT: Last question. Welcome, AFP. Front desk here.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Don’t you fear on the other side that too much pressure, too tough pressure on Pakistan may destabilize the Islamabad and may have destabilizing all the region with having Taliban stronger in the country?

SECRETARY TILLERSON: That is a concern, and that’s why I made the comments I just made, that I think it’s important that Pakistan begin to think about its ability to contain these groups as well.

It’s why, though, we take a regional approach. The U.S. alone is not going to change this dynamic with Pakistan. India and Pakistan, they have their own issues that they have to continue to work through, but I think there are areas where perhaps even India can take some steps of rapprochement on issues with Pakistan to improve the stability within Pakistan and remove some of the reasons why they deal with these unstable elements inside their own country.

As I said, other regional players have strong interest in Pakistan. China has strong interest in Pakistan. Having a stable, secure future Pakistan is in a lot of our interests. They are a nuclear power. We have concerns about their weapons, the security of their weapons. There are many areas in which we believe we should be having very productive dialogue that serves both of our interests and regional interest as well.

So this is – again, this is not a situation where the U.S. is saying, “Look, it’s just us and you.” What our approach is to bring – as I said, these regional approaches is to bring all the other interest into this effort. Much as we’ve done with North Korea and assembling this global effort in North Korea, I think too often we try to distill these challenges down to where it’s just the U.S. and some other country and only between the two of us can we solve it. We have to enlarge the circle of interest and bring others to – into the effort as well, and that’s what we’ll be doing with Pakistan as well.


From the US State Department website:

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Press Availability

Meanwhile any notion that the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan may have nurtured that US Secretary of State Tillerson’s call for “Rapprochement” implied a change in the hands-off US policy on Jammu & Kashmir, in line with India’s position that no third party mediation will be permitted in the resolution of J&K, goes up smoke. In addition any hope that the Punjabi Military dominated Deep State of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan may have harboured of leveraging a down hill skiing surrender to the US on the matter of fomenting Mohammadden Terrorism in Afghanistan for support on Jammu & Kashmir, goes up in smoke.

Heather Nauert
Spokesperson
Department Press Briefing
Washington, DC
August 23, 2017 ………………………….

QUESTION: And – thank you. Just in terms of the – of Pakistan, yesterday, Secretary Tillerson said that India – even India could take some steps of rapprochement to remove some of the reasons why Pakistan deals with these unstable elements inside their country. What was he referring to in terms of the steps India could take?

MS NAUERT: I think one of the things that we would do is ask or encourage India and Pakistan to sit down together and engage in direct dialogue that is aimed at reducing tensions between both of those countries.

QUESTION: So is he linking, for example, a solution – a policy on – of – for a solution on Kashmir with Pakistan-Afghanistan issues?

MS NAUERT: Well, I think going up to 30,000 feet, we view the whole strategy and handling Afghanistan as being a regional strategy, and that, of course, incorporates India as well as Pakistan, so incorporating all the nations in that region who can – we believe can help assist and help make Afghanistan a stable place where you’ll never have a terror group that will take root in that country again and can launch attacks on other countries.

QUESTION: Yeah, but does the U.S. see pushing for a solution on Kashmir as part of this regional strategy to deal with Afghanistan?

MS NAUERT: In terms of Kashmir, our policy on that has not changed. We continue to encourage the sides to sit down and talk together about that.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1826
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Manish_P » 24 Aug 2017 11:21

Cain Marko wrote:Is always nice to handle trouble away from ones own borders no? Not to mention the many advantages in terms of holding pok in a pincers and easier access to Balochistan.

Anyway regarding Indias response. ...my guess is arms purchases will boom, and Afghanistan will see more Indian hardware. ..hinds, dhruvs?, t72s?


Yes, provided we are there primarily to handle our troubles, not somebody elses.. Please explain how we are going to have POK in pincer when we are 'requested' to do only 'nation building' (whatever that means) and not have any military prescence.. is whatever we have done so far in Afghanistan not considered to be 'nation building'?

With regards to arms ...i would rather it was arms sales (INSAS, Dhruvs, Mahindra/TATA MRAPs, Arjuns) and not just arms purchases donated to them as gifts.. No doubt the afghans would use them against the pakis (if that is the pincer you are referring to) but the afghans will primarily use them as and where they see fit. They are loathe to be told what to do and are just as liable to turn on us kaffirs if they get it into their heads that we are dictating to them.

Agree with you that more scum is headed to Kashmir, that is happening even now and the rate will pick up even more as Pakistan goes in deeper and deeper.

Totally agree with your point about the MEA wanting the US to stay in afghanistan. India would be truly happy if the US takes out ALL the jihadis.. not just the ones which threaten the US service members, officials and interests.

India had tried to take the initiative when 9/11 happened but was totally rebuffed. Now the US needs us and wants us to take the initiative. Fine, but there must be quid pro quo on pro rata basis... not on 'India makes billions of dollars in trade with the United States' and so it must do this and it must do that.. No sensitive ego, just plain business.. something which Trump should comprehend ?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23517
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby SSridhar » 24 Aug 2017 11:40

Manish_P wrote: Fine, but there must be quid pro quo on pro rata basis... not on 'India makes billions of dollars in trade with the United States' and so it must do this and it must do that.. No sensitive ego, just plain business.. something which Trump should comprehend ?

In fact, he is being a businessman when he says, "India makes billions of dollars in trade with us . . .". Like any American President he is also thinking of a transaction here. At the same time, he wants to preempt India demanding its pound of flesh for such a cooperation by claiming that India's trade balance with the US already offsets any favours/demands from India.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1826
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Manish_P » 24 Aug 2017 11:45

^ Exactly, Sir. We need to make sure that the transaction is beneficial to us. Thankfully we have a hard nosed business minded 'chaiwallah' prime minister, who will take utmost care to buy into whatever they are trying to sell us only if it is of benefit to us.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby arun » 24 Aug 2017 12:35

Unfortunately our "hardnosed businessminded chaiwallah" seems to have fallen under the thrall of US President Donald Trump and slipped into an abjectly grovelling flattery mode. I hope this is a momentary aberration:

arun wrote:
Prime Minister Modi thanked President Trump for his strong leadership uniting the world against the North Korean menace.


If true that this is indeed what our Prime Minister Narendra Modi said, I am truly disgusted at this abject grovelling our Prime Minister. I say that as North Korea is a minor direct security threat in comparison to the menance of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Peoples Republic of China etc., as at worst North Korea represents a menace only from the limited standpoint of proliferating missile technology to the Islamic Republic. If on the other hand this is a bit of Self Aggandisement by Donald Trump then India must officially deny.

Bollocks to any “Half Wit Saudi Princes”, “It's in our national interest to flatter them” type arguents that were trotted out in the Hindustan Times article posted by me on this same page of this thread (Clicky)


Readout of President Donald J. Trump’s Call with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Viv S » 24 Aug 2017 13:25

sudeepj wrote:My question is, did Pakistan 'allow' the drone strikes? Did Pakistan 'allow' the killing of Bin Laden? Does Pakistan 'allow' the things they say RAW does in Karachi? Did Pakistan 'allow' the Afghan invasion?

Fact of the matter is, Pakistan is a weak state, subject to superpower whims and fancies. A state whose 'mahishiyat' is dependent on exporting 'tauliya' and 'chadar' can not impose conditions on superpowers that also happen to be its sole market for its commoditized exports. People mention Salala, but Salala and the subsequent happenings occurred at a time when there was no CPEC, no upping of the ante in SCS, no detente between India and the US and no Trump.

If they try to obstruct the Americans, the American/NATO response may well be to impose trade sanctions on Pak (under some obscure bylaw and rule they will discover or invent.. dont start quoting WTO rules now!) and that will be truly catastrophic for Pak economy. There is nothing they can sell to China.. And no more takers for their nuke and missile technologies. North Korea has better nukes and missiles, Libya is gone, Iran is a threat to them, Saudis are naraz and reassured that US is back as a security guarantor, so which customer is left?

Well, Pakistan allowed the Afghan Taliban & Quetta Shura to thrive within its borders. It allowed OBL to live in garrison town in the Pakistani heartland (and had the Americans brought them in, would probably have enabled his escape) and allowed Mullah Omar to receive medical treatment in Karachi. And even today, its actions against the Haqqani group remain 'insufficient' (as the US Congress is annually notified by the DoD).

Pakistan is indeed a weak state. So was Vietnam, circa 1963-72. What it is, is an example of the limits of hard power. What matters more than power, is the perception of power, and the last 15 years have not been good to the global perception of US power.

An equally big problem is that the US is not dealing with an entirely rational actor. The Pakistanis have convinced themselves that China and the CPEC will be their salvation - and they hold on to that belief like a fidayeen holds onto his faith in paradise. Add to that a "we will eat grass" national ego and its evident that there will be no practical shift in the status quo.

The trade/financial sanctions weapon can be used against Pakistan only once - and that's when the ISAF mission in Afghanistan has been written off and securing its supplies lines is not a factor. Until then the facade of cooperation/alliance has to be maintained.

As for Trump, lets just say I'd be surprised if he could point out Pakistan on a map without getting it mixed up with Iran or Afghanistan. His real strength, coming from years in marketing & reality TV, has been to convince his supporters that his views perfectly line up with their own (even though his support base spans a wide variety political & economic beliefs).

The libertarians and anti-globalists are convinced that he'll pull America out of all these expensive pointless overseas entanglements while the militarists & nationalists are convinced he'll double up and go even harder in an effort to crush ISIS & the Taliban. Meanwhile, all poor Donald wants, is to play the occasional round of golf at one of his resorts and for the press to say nice things about him or at least stop saying mean things.

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 726
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Y. Kanan » 24 Aug 2017 13:35

India should commit absolutely no blood or treasure to Afghanistan until the US proves it is serious about holding Pakistan accountable. I give no credence to Trump's recent statements about Pakistan. Even if Trump could find Pakistan on a map, even if he understood their true nature, it wouldn't matter as the Deep State won't allow any punitive action against sacred cows like Pakistan, Saudi, etc.

We'd be fools to go gaga over this apparent policy reversal. Nothing will come of it.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby srin » 24 Aug 2017 14:34

Every problem is an opportunity. If we have been and further going to spend money on Afghanistan, then I say, spend in military training of the Afghans. Heck, convince Afghans to start military draft of their women and invest our money in training and equipping them with guns and light arty. That will take care of the Talibs, AQ and ISIS. And some special forces to operate in Balochistan. Why should we alone worry about fighting one-and-half or two-and-half front wars.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23314
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Austin » 24 Aug 2017 14:40

All we will get from Afghanistan are body bags of Indian Soldier , All that US and NATO got from Afghanistan are body bags in past 16 years , $4 Trillion Spent , Nothing to Show

Trump is doing nothing new that Obama & GWB jr didnt try , its just a continuation of the same policy under new name.

If any thing else ISI will use Afghanistan as a staging ground to kill more of our soldiers in a more Determined Jihadi Manner , Let the US solve the Afghan problem on its own since they and Paki created this , So let the two friends solve their problem , Let us wash our hands off and just help the Aghan people which we are doing for a decade now.

hanumadu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4275
Joined: 11 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby hanumadu » 24 Aug 2017 17:27

SSridhar wrote:
Manish_P wrote: Fine, but there must be quid pro quo on pro rata basis... not on 'India makes billions of dollars in trade with the United States' and so it must do this and it must do that.. No sensitive ego, just plain business.. something which Trump should comprehend ?

In fact, he is being a businessman when he says, "India makes billions of dollars in trade with us . . .". Like any American President he is also thinking of a transaction here. At the same time, he wants to preempt India demanding its pound of flesh for such a cooperation by claiming that India's trade balance with the US already offsets any favours/demands from India.


We have a paltry 27 billion trade surplus compared with 350 china has and 60 Germany has. So does Mexico. And any money they spend on India is recovered many times more by re exporting the services/software to the rest of the world. Apple, google, MS, facebook makes most of their revenue outside US. It is highly debatable how much they would have been adapted outside or overcome world wide competition without access to Indian human resources. Google already makes 1 billion from India. Each of these companies will probably start making much more from India in a decades time at which time I doubt India will have any surplus with USA. In fact, India should welcome Trumps statements of protectionism and encourage domestic tech companies.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11115
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby A_Gupta » 24 Aug 2017 17:46

Viv S wrote:Well, Pakistan allowed the Afghan Taliban & Quetta Shura to thrive within its borders. It allowed OBL to live in garrison town in the Pakistani heartland (and had the Americans brought them in, would probably have enabled his escape) and allowed Mullah Omar to receive medical treatment in Karachi. And even today, its actions against the Haqqani group remain 'insufficient' (as the US Congress is annually notified by the DoD).


Since this happened November 2001, perhaps many of the young 'uns on BRF are not aware of it, but the American and Afghan Northern Alliance forces had chased the Taliban and al Qaeda bad guys and their Pakistani ISI and military supports into Kunduz and had the town surrounded.

But then, instead of wiping them out, the Americans allowed an airlift out of Kunduz, supposedly just for the Pakistanis, but it turned out a lot of the bad guys were airlifted out of Kunduz into Pakistan.

So remember, Republican President, America smarting over 9/11 just about 2 months previously, the biggest attack ever on US soil; America in full war mode, America shooting at Pakistanis, American public opinion as resolutely warlike as it can ever be; and the outcome, America let Pakistan off the hook along with Taliban and al Qaeda. The best face one can put on this is that somehow the US government believed that a Pakistani jihadi is innocent compared to other jihadis.

So don't hope that America, Trump or not, is going to seriously squeeze Pakistan until **after** the fact.

And if Pakistan allowed bad guys to live on their soil, America allowed them to be transported there, to bedevil American troops in Afghanistan for the last sixteen years. For all the lip service that American politicians pay to their soldiers and veterans, the American GI is simply cannon fodder for them; American politicians will sacrifice them to "geopolitical compulsions" or whatever bullshit. They want to play their games, and divert federal dollars to arms manufacture, contracts for the armed forces, and for paying mercenaries -- and those entrepreneurs help finance their election campaigns. So far the most corrupt Indian politicians have been more hesitant to put Indian soldiers in harms' way for bullshit reasons, and BRF should hope that that does not change.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby RajeshA » 24 Aug 2017 19:30

Only quid pro quo for Indian involvement in Afghanistan is independence of Balochistan from Pakistan and reintegration of PoK with India. In any case these are the prerequisites of having a viable supply route to Afghanistan for India.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11019
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby pankajs » 25 Aug 2017 00:25

I haven't followed the thread for quite a while now. Too much of an effort to go back and get on top of issues.

Like RajeshA saar, we would grant access to Afghanistan via Kashmir via road and air if the US gets bakis out of POK. That would be our main contribution to the Afghan war effort.

Plus we could offer to build the dam on Kabul pronto and help bring irrigation and electricity to the development table. Plus some other small developmental projects like schools, hospital, transmission lines, road, etc.

Avtar Singh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 100
Joined: 22 Jan 2017 02:07

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Avtar Singh » 25 Aug 2017 02:26

I am sure India will not need any help with PoK, no need to expect/ask america to do anything much...
The fact that the ASEs (Anglo Saxon Elites) as I like to call them; USA and Britain will stand pat has to be a massive sea change for India.
Imagine how difficult an Indian resolution would have been with both ASEs and PakChinistan against India..
Now it ?could? be just china.

India would have had to wait until its economy was the size of america!

Re integration of PoK and cutting off china has to be a quid pro quo.
I think the citizenry of said countries usa/uk are also now ready for the required actions to be taken.
Anecdotally the best comment I have read from an anglo saxon, on this subject; “go on gupta press the red button”

What a change from the 1990s!

There has to be something different brewing.....
Ramana posted a video of SS some time back, cant remember which thread, big changes would explain his cheshire cat grin when discussing afghan and usa.

How will pakistani elites feel if they were to loose their two favourite destinations; usa and uk? Will china feel like the same kind of place?
The planning and lobbying going on in the background must be at full tilt!!

Just like there is no mention of India/China troubles in the western press..
there will no India/pak nuclear war nonsense. Just stony silence on this subject from bbc/cnn, they will have their spinning orders.

But then again it could all end up.... business as usual and it will be back to waiting for the economy to be big enough to take on everyone!

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1607
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby sudeepj » 25 Aug 2017 21:55

ldev wrote:
sudeepj wrote:Pak is in a weird place now.. The only benefactor left is China (US, US, Japan and Arab Sunni powers are gone) and China may well find it challenging to prop up their shitty economy with grants and trade concessions. So far they have extended unaffordable loans and ports, bridges and roads to nowhere that can only create a greater debt burden that will bankrupt the recipients even more than they already are. The Chinese will definitely find it impossible to stop the wrath of the great Khan and the great Chakravartin.


If China can covertly help North Korea which is directly threatening the US with nuclear weapons, you think they won't help Pakistan, which in any event says "Hain Huzoor", every time the US looks at them? The biggest reason China has to prop up Pakistan is to keep India distracted. How much do you think that distraction is worth to China?


NK is in a different league compared to Pak. Much smaller population (25 million) and a much more 'unified' and 'effective' state in how it is able to deal with rebellions. It also has secure borders, both physical and electronic. Pakistan needs several orders of magnitude higher economic support, has terrible border security and much less control of its dissident groups - Mohajirs, Baloch, Pashtun and Sindhis. While China is indeed a large economy, its barely into middle income territory. While the US is able to 'mint' money out of thin air through IMF/WB and issue aid, China has not yet been able to do this. Their aid comes with Chinese companies, workers etc. Its a way for them to export excess capacity and does not help the host country at all. Therefore, I believe, that maintaining Pakistanis tastes will be a far more difficult thing for China that supporting NK.

ldev wrote:While it will be very nice for India to have some kind of overt military presence in Afghanistan, the biggest and IMO insurmountable obstacle is the lack of direct access to support that military presence. Iran is a very un-reliable actor vis-a-vis India. It is rapidly slipping into China's orbit and to rely on the goodwill of Iran for any kind of transit is IMO highly risky with the high probability of China leaning on Iran at some point of time in the future to block Indian transit rights into Afghanistan and other places in Central Asia. That will be how the India China competition for influence will play out.


We dont need a physical presence for us to have some kind of agency on that border. Indeed, there is no question of a physical overt presence without any official alliance. But there are things we can do all along the eastern border and deep within Pakistan. I feel, the only thing stopping us was alignment with US interests. US stopped us from taking any overt action because they needed the lines of communication for logistics for their 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. Now that US and Indian interests are aligned.. I dont need to say anything more. That popping sound you hear comes from the RAW HQ.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1607
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby sudeepj » 25 Aug 2017 21:58

hanumadu wrote:
SSridhar wrote:In fact, he is being a businessman when he says, "India makes billions of dollars in trade with us . . .". Like any American President he is also thinking of a transaction here. At the same time, he wants to preempt India demanding its pound of flesh for such a cooperation by claiming that India's trade balance with the US already offsets any favours/demands from India.


We have a paltry 27 billion trade surplus compared with 350 china has and 60 Germany has. So does Mexico. And any money they spend on India is recovered many times more by re exporting the services/software to the rest of the world. Apple, google, MS, facebook makes most of their revenue outside US. It is highly debatable how much they would have been adapted outside or overcome world wide competition without access to Indian human resources. Google already makes 1 billion from India. Each of these companies will probably start making much more from India in a decades time at which time I doubt India will have any surplus with USA. In fact, India should welcome Trumps statements of protectionism and encourage domestic tech companies.


Not just that, this trade surplus will be reduced by Indian purchase of US nat gas, oil and weapons exports. I am afraid, the age of running large trade surplus the way China did is over. US wont make the same mistake twice.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1607
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby sudeepj » 25 Aug 2017 22:01

The best take on this issue has been by Raja Mohan, Its right for Indians to be skeptical of a new American policy, but not right to be cynical. This could be the first steps in a sea change of the situation (even maps) in South Asia! First time stars are aligning this way since 1971.

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinio ... n-4810529/

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21035
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Prem » 30 Aug 2017 02:43


Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Guddu » 30 Aug 2017 04:18

Thank you for posting the above video, its fantastic. I was heartened to hear that the Indian side prepares very well for their negotiations. Also the inside story re: the nuclear deal was amazing. Its no wonder that the bakis take a beating everytime they discuss the Indus Water Treaty with us :mrgreen:

P.S. This also tells me how we might have negotiated with the Chinese on Doklam...blunt NO!

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9911
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby sum » 30 Aug 2017 06:15

^^ But of course, all the MEA and other arms of the govt are unprepared guys with no national interests in mind who are always getting walked over by every 3rd rate power too and require urgent lessons( by keyboard warriors) in how to stand up for national interests ( as per BRF wisdom)

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7021
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby JE Menon » 30 Aug 2017 10:23

If we are looking for pats on the back from white people, our recent colonizers, Stephen Cohen and Robert Baer among others have some good things to say about our bureaucracy and intelligence ...

BRF has been saying good things for years now. Even Sharm Al Shaik is now proving useful. Ever heard the Paks say they want to talk about Balochistan with us? Although when that error was made, it was a bad one at the express behest of our automaton premier manmohan. Babu Shiv Shankar Menon should not have swallowed it.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1607
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby sudeepj » 30 Aug 2017 22:37

Viv S wrote:
Pakistan is indeed a weak state. So was Vietnam, circa 1963-72. What it is, is an example of the limits of hard power. What matters more than power, is the perception of power, and the last 15 years have not been good to the global perception of US power.


I will argue that North Vietnam was a much stronger nation state compared to Pakistan. They had the will to endure untold miseries to win their freedom and a reunification. Compared to them, Pakistan is a multi ethnic state kept together with a very heavy hand by Pak Mil. If the promised prosperity does not come, or worse, if the actions of the state cause misery to the population, virtually every state other than Punjab would like to be free from the yoke of Pakjabi jihad on India.

Viv S wrote:An equally big problem is that the US is not dealing with an entirely rational actor.


They are completely, and utterly rational. They are stupid in how they cant think more than the immediate reactions to their actions, but if the immediate reactions to their action impose unbearable pain on them, they react as any other rational human being would. They put on a very good act of being irrational though.

The trade/financial sanctions weapon can be used against Pakistan only once - and that's when the ISAF mission in Afghanistan has been written off and securing its supplies lines is not a factor. Until then the facade of cooperation/alliance has to be maintained.


Let me put it this way.. The options available to a motivated Super Power are **unlimited**. She has just signaled her motivation and commitment is indeed unlimited. Its right to be skeptical, but not right to be cynical.


Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Cain Marko » 02 Sep 2017 14:41

^he was bigly involved in the much this touted strategic partnership and Indo US tech group.... Looks like Trump is taking the relationship forward. Here come the f16s...

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11115
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby A_Gupta » 03 Sep 2017 21:47

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... ce/538779/
I like this paragraph.
But history tells us that sheer power is often not enough: The most powerful side in a contest of threats frequently doesn’t win. The U.S. had more military, economic, and political power than Japan in 1941, Vietnam in 1965, Iraq and North Korea in the 1990s, and Pakistan after 9/11. And yet, American leaders were unsuccessful in preventing Japan’s entry into World War II, gaining victory in Vietnam, keeping North Korea from leaving the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, convincing Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait without resorting to war, or winning Pakistan’s full assistance in countering terrorism, including the hunt for Osama bin Laden.


Some other good stuff:
In foreign policy, talk isn’t just cheap. It’s dangerous. In any conflict, all sides want to make it look like they’ll go to war even when they really don’t want to. The incentive to bluff is high and information (about the other side’s interests, resolve, and capabilities) is imperfect. Wars often occur through miscalculation and misperceived signals. Credible threats are hard to make with words alone.

American presidents, from Truman to Reagan, all used the same basic approach: using actions to speak more loudly than words. Ever wonder why there are so many U.S. forces in Germany— which numbered as many as 200,000 during the Cold War? These “tripwire” forces were stationed there to die, not just fight. American military planners were worried the Soviets might not believe the U.S. would extend its nuclear umbrella over NATO in an actual conflict, and as result, that the Soviets would be tempted to use their overwhelming conventional forces to invade. But if thousands of Americans died when Soviet tanks rolled across Germany, the U.S. would have no choice. American involvement, including the use of nuclear weapons, would be guaranteed. And mutual assured destruction would hang in the balance. This costly signal made some sense in an insane, Dr. Strangelove sort of way. American leaders didn’t need to say much. American troops said it all.


Very important for India:
What makes threats credible today? I put this question to 250 foreign military officers over the past two years. Their answers were surprising. The No. 1 ranked factor in threat credibility was not a country’s willingness to risk soldiers’ lives, its superior power, or even its reputation for carrying out threats. It was domestic political support for military action.

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19481
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Raja Bose » 11 Sep 2017 03:45

Nikki Haley - Bull in a China shop

Just in case MUTUs were expecting her to bat for anyone except her massa.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16221
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby NRao » 11 Sep 2017 04:12

Cain Marko wrote:^he was bigly involved in the much this touted strategic partnership and Indo US tech group.... Looks like Trump is taking the relationship forward. Here come the f16s...


F-16: Side show.

Vishal (along with the Vikrant), AMCA and F-18 will be the main event.


svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby svenkat » 14 Sep 2017 13:14

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449983/debbie-wasserman-schultz-pakistani-computer-guys-more-bank-fraud

There’s more than bank fraud going on here. In Washington, it’s never about what they tell you it’s about. So take this to the bank: The case of Imran Awan, Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s mysterious Pakistani IT guy, is not about bank fraud. Yet bank fraud was the stated charge on which Awan was arrested at Dulles Airport this week, just as he was trying to flee the United States for Pakistan, via Qatar. That is the same route taken by Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi, in March, when she suddenly fled the country, with three young daughters she yanked out of school, mega-luggage, and $12,400 in cash.




By then, the proceeds of the fraudulent $165,000 loan they’d gotten from the Congressional Federal Credit Union had been sent ahead. It was part of a $283,000 transfer that Awan managed to wire from Capitol Hill. He pulled it off — hilariously, if infuriatingly — by pretending to be his wife in a phone call with the credit union. Told that his proffered reason for the transfer (“funeral arrangements”) wouldn’t fly, “Mrs.” Awan promptly repurposed: Now “she” was “buying property.” Asking no more questions, the credit union wired the money . . . to Pakistan.




As you let all that sink in, consider this: Awan and his family cabal of fraudsters had access for years to the e-mails and other electronic files of members of the House’s Intelligence and Foreign Affairs Committees. It turns out they were accessing members’ computers without their knowledge, transferring files to remote servers, and stealing computer equipment — including hard drives that Awan & Co. smashed to bits of bytes before making tracks.




They were fired in February. All except Awan, that is. He continued in the employ of Wasserman Schultz, the Florida Democrat, former DNC chairwoman, and Clinton crony. She kept him in place at the United States Congress right up until he was nabbed at the airport on Monday. This is not about bank fraud. The Awan family swindles are plentiful, but they are just window-dressing. This appears to be a real conspiracy, aimed at undermining American national security. At the time of his arrest, [b]the 37-year-old Imran Awan had been working for Democrats as an information technologist for 13 years. He started out with Representative Gregory Meeks (D., N.Y.) in 2004. The next year, he landed on the staff of Wasserman Schultz, who had just been elected to the House. Congressional-staff salaries are modest, in the $40,000 range. For some reason, Awan was paid about four times as much. He also managed to get his wife, Alvi, on the House payroll . . . then his brother, Abid Awan . . . then Abid’s wife, Natalia Sova. The youngest of the clan, Awan’s brother Jamal, came on board in 2014 — the then-20-year-old commanding an annual salary of $160,000. A few of these arrangements appear to have been sinecures: While some Awans were rarely seen around the office, we now know they were engaged in extensive financial shenanigans away from the Capitol. Nevertheless, the Daily Caller’s Luke Rosiak, who has been all over this story, reports that, for their IT “work,” the Pakistani family has reeled in $4 million from U.S. taxpayers since 2009. That’s just the “legit” dough. The family business evidently dabbles in procurement fraud, too. The Capitol Police and FBI are exploring widespread double-billing for computers, other communication devices, and related equipment. Why were they paid so much for doing so little? Intriguing as it is, that’s a side issue. A more pressing question is: Why were they given access to highly sensitive government information? Ordinarily, that requires a security clearance, awarded only after a background check that peruses ties to foreign countries, associations with unsavory characters, and vulnerability to blackmail. These characters could not possibly have qualified. Never mind access; it’s hard to fathom how they retained their jobs. The Daily Caller has also discovered that the family, which controlled several properties, was involved in various suspicious mortgage transfers. Abid Awan, while working “full-time” in Congress, ran a curious auto-retail business called “Cars International A” (yes, CIA), through which he was accused of stealing money and merchandise. In 2012, he discharged debts in bankruptcy (while scheming to keep his real-estate holdings). Congressional Democrats hired Abid despite his drunk-driving conviction a month before he started at the House, and they retained him despite his public-drunkenness arrest a month after. Beyond that, he and Imran both committed sundry vehicular offenses. In civil lawsuits, they are accused of life-insurance fraud.
[/b]



Democrats now say that any access to sensitive information was “unauthorized.” But how hard could it have been to get “unauthorized” access when House Intelligence Committee Dems wanted their staffers to have unbounded access? In 2016, they wrote a letter to an appropriations subcommittee seeking funding so their staffers could obtain “Top Secret — Sensitive Compartmented Information” clearances. TS/SCI is the highest-level security classification. Awan family members were working for a number of the letter’s signatories. Democratic members, of course, would not make such a request without coordination with leadership. Did I mention that the ranking member on the appropriations subcommittee to whom the letter was addressed was Debbie Wasserman Schultz? Why has the investigation taken so long? Why so little enforcement action until this week? Why, most of all, were Wasserman Schultz and her fellow Democrats so indulgent of the Awans? The probe began in late 2016. In short order, the Awans clearly knew they were hot numbers. They started arranging the fraudulent credit-union loan in December, and the $283,000 wire transfer occurred on January 18. In early February, House security services informed representatives that the Awans were suspects in a criminal investigation. At some point, investigators found stolen equipment stashed in the Rayburn House Office Building, including a laptop that appears to belong to Wasserman Schultz and that Imran was using. Although the Awans were banned from the Capitol computer network, not only did Wasserman Schultz keep Imran on staff for several additional months, but Meeks retained Alvi until February 28 — five days before she skedaddled to Lahore. Strange thing about that: On March 5, the FBI (along with the Capitol Police) got to Dulles Airport in time to stop Alvi before she embarked. It was discovered that she was carrying $12,400 in cash. As I pointed out this week, it is a felony to export more than $10,000 in currency from the U.S. without filing a currency transportation report. It seems certain that Alvi did not file one: In connection with her husband’s arrest this week, the FBI submitted to the court a complaint affidavit that describes Alvi’s flight but makes no mention of a currency transportation report. Yet far from making an arrest, agents permitted her to board the plane and leave the country, notwithstanding their stated belief that she has no intention of returning. Many congressional staffers are convinced that they’d long ago have been in handcuffs if they pulled what the Awans are suspected of. Nevertheless, no arrests were made when the scandal became public in February. For months, Imran has been strolling around the Capitol. In the interim, Wasserman Schultz has been battling investigators: demanding the return of her laptop, invoking a constitutional privilege (under the speech-and-debate clause) to impede agents from searching it, and threatening the Capitol Police with “consequences” if they don’t relent. Only last week, according to Fox News, did she finally signal willingness to drop objections to a scan of the laptop by federal investigators. Her stridency in obstructing the investigation has been jarring. As evidence has mounted, the scores of Democrats for whom the Awans worked have expressed no alarm. Instead, we’ve heard slanderous suspicions that the investigation is a product of — all together now — “Islamophobia.” But Samina Gilani, the Awan brothers’ stepmother, begs to differ. Gilani complained to Virginia police that the Awans secretly bugged her home and then used the recordings to blackmail her. She averred in court documents that she was pressured to surrender cash she had stored in Pakistan. Imran claimed to be “very powerful” — so powerful he could order her family members kidnapped. We don’t know if these allegations are true, but they are disturbing. The Awans have had the opportunity to acquire communications and other information that could prove embarrassing, or worse, especially for the pols who hired them. Did the swindling staffers compromise members of Congress? Does blackmail explain why were they able to go unscathed for so long? And as for that sensitive information, did the Awans send American secrets, along with those hundreds of thousands of American dollars, to Pakistan? This is no run-of-the-mill bank-fraud case.


shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby shyam » 17 Sep 2017 01:28

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHbrOg092GA
Long one by a new whistle blower, worth watching.

Added later - JE Menon
New: CIA Agent Whistleblower Risks All To Expose The Shadow Government

Thanks for the link but copy paste the title boss, spare us the hassle so admins don't have to go and do it ...
Last edited by shyam on 17 Sep 2017 09:56, edited 1 time in total.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23517
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby SSridhar » 17 Sep 2017 07:47

shyam wrote:Long one, worth watching.


Why don't you just add a caption of what it is all about?


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: devesh, DharmaB, ravikr, Rony, VTanMay, williams and 39 guests